Committee publication · Correspondence · 30 October 2025

Letter from Sir Chris Wormald, Cabinet Secretary and Head of the UK Civil Service on the process of the appointment of the former Ambassador to the United States - Lord Mandelson, dated 30.10.25

From: Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee

Summary

Sir Chris Wormald sets out the Cabinet Office's account of the appointment process for Lord Mandelson as Ambassador to the United States, explaining the due diligence exercise undertaken, its scope and limitations, and new procedural safeguards introduced following the appointment's withdrawal. The letter confirms the Epstein relationship was publicly known at appointment but that 'materially different information' subsequently emerged.

Key findings

Due diligence is an 'in-house' exercise collating largely publicly available information, not a formal approval stage; the Civil Service has no veto over ministerial appointments.
The Cabinet Office due diligence report on Lord Mandelson included his professional and financial relationships, previous ministerial resignations, and his prior relationship with Jeffrey Epstein sourced from media and National Archives records.
The FCDO was not consulted during due diligence as it is standard practice for the appointing minister's department to conduct the initial check without sharing it with other departments.
The Prime Minister made the final decision to proceed; the relationship with Epstein was in the public domain at appointment, but the PM has stated 'materially different information subsequently emerged'.
New guidance now requires due diligence for all Direct Ministerial Appointments, pre-appointment interviews for high-profile roles, and a summary for the appointing minister's consideration.

Tone

Procedural

Topics

diplomatic-appointmentsgovernancedue-diligenceconflicts-of-interest

Key actors

Sir Chris Wormald, Prime Minister, Lord Mandelson, Simon Hoare, Cabinet Office, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO), National Archives

Notable line

“If that information had been available at the time the appointment would not have proceeded.”

Key Quotes

“It is not a formal approval stage through which an appointment must progress, and the Civil Service has no 'veto' over the preferred appointee.”
— Sir Chris Wormald · explaining the limited nature of due diligence

“The former Ambassador's relationship with Jeffrey Epstein was in the public domain at the time of the appointment. As the Prime Minister has said, materially different information subsequently emerged.”
— Sir Chris Wormald · addressing concerns about the Epstein relationship not being flagged

“Due diligence is generally carried out by the appointing minister's department (in this case it was carried out by the Cabinet Office on behalf of No 10) so is not usually shared with other departments, and was not in this case.”
— Sir Chris Wormald · explaining why FCDO was not consulted

“The decision as to whether to proceed with an appointment is made by the relevant minister, in this case the Prime Minister.”
— Sir Chris Wormald · clarifying who holds final decision-making authority

View original document →

Source · parliament.uk record ↗